<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type> <META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=GENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=#ffffff> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- <DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black">From: <A href="mailto:rjensen@uts.cc.utexas.edu" title=rjensen@uts.cc.utexas.edu>Robert Jensen</A> </DIV> <DIV>Subject: STATEMENT OF KISSINGER PROTEST ORGANIZERS</DIV></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> STATEMENT OF KISSINGER PROTEST ORGANIZERS Jan. 29, 2000 for more information contact: Bob Jensen, 471-1990, <A href="mailto:rjensen@uts.cc.utexas.edu">rjensen@uts.cc.utexas.edu</A> Rahul Mahajan, 477-5902, <A href="mailto:rahul@peaches.ph.utexas.edu">rahul@peaches.ph.utexas.edu</A> The comments of University of Texas administrators about the planned protest of Henry Kissinger's speech on campus are so full of false claims, distortions and obfuscations that a response is necessary to set the record straight. A diverse group of campus and community groups and individuals held a teach-in on Jan. 25 and were planning a peaceful demonstration at Kissinger's talk on Feb. 1. In the best tradition of non-violent political dissent, our goal was to speak truth to power, to challenge a former public official about his record of subverting democracy (as in Chile), supporting genocide (as in East Timor), and conducting an illegal war (as in Southeast Asia). In short, as citizens of a democracy, we planned to hold Kissinger accountable for his crimes against humanity. At no time did the groups or individuals involved consider, discuss, or plan a violent protest. Our fliers made it clear we would be peaceful, as did information posted on a web site. We planned to use the traditional methods of communication open to dissenters who are shut out of the mainstream media and powerful institutions: leaflets, signs, speeches. In short, we planned to exercise our free speech. Many of those involved have planned dozens of protests in the past few years in Austin, all of which have been completely non-violent. In response to this, Harry Middleton, the director of the LBJ Library, stated that organizations ("some local, some imported" -- reminiscent of hackneyed charges of  "outside agitators") would deny Kissinger "his right to speak." University Chancellor William Cunningham and President Larry Faulkner manufactured concerns about public safety, never explaining just how the public would be endangered. Faulkner accused the protesters of "threats of assault on a peaceable, academic assembly" and called us immoral. In truly Orwellian fashion, the chancellor suggested that by trying to speak, we would abridge the free speech rights of Kissinger and/or the community. The charges that we wanted to shut down the event are ludicrous; instead, we wanted to open up the discussion and make it more than a stage-managed pseudo-event. The university has made a cheap attempt to marginalize and demonize political dissent. Authorities in this culture honor dissent in the abstract and in the distant past, but they want to avert it in the present.  In a meaningful democracy, the ability of citizens to speak to each other about politics is central. That's what we intended to do -- to hand out leaflets and engage people attending the speech in dialogue. Citizens in a democracy also have a right, and an obligation, to demand from public officials explanations for policies. We intended to ask that Kissinger respond to questions from the audience in a real dialogue, not just to pre-screened written questions as the organizers of his appearance apparently had planned.   Far from being afraid of violence, it seems UT officials and Henry Kissinger were afraid of dialogue. </BODY></HTML>